PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

No conditional Offer
stewpots
post Sat, 19 Aug 2017 - 12:04
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,198



I have just got a NIP from a 'mobile unit'

It states if you wish to contest it evidence etc will be produced in magistrates court

Don't i have the right to see the evidence before the magistrates

I dont deny i was driving in the area but i refuse to believe i was doing 86mph in rush hour traffic on A34 its not physically possible
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Sat, 19 Aug 2017 - 12:04
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stewpots
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 11:47
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,198



So basically I have no write of disclosure before the court date ?

ie they can 'produce' the notice of offer to the magistrate on the day of the trail ?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 12:10
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,713
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (stewpots @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 11:47) *
ie they can 'produce' the notice of offer to the magistrate on the day of the trail ?


Yes.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 12:58
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27,673
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Why would the police be producing the offer in court?


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 13:33
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,020
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (stewpots @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 11:47) *
So basically I have no write of disclosure before the court date ?

ie they can 'produce' the notice of offer to the magistrate on the day of the trail ?

You have a right to evidence related to the offence before court, but a conditional offer (or the absence of one) is irrelevant to whether you committed the offence or not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stewpots
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 18:29
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,198



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 13:33) *
QUOTE (stewpots @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 11:47) *
So basically I have no write of disclosure before the court date ?

ie they can 'produce' the notice of offer to the magistrate on the day of the trail ?

You have a right to evidence related to the offence before court, but a conditional offer (or the absence of one) is irrelevant to whether you committed the offence or not.


So i received the single justice procedure notice just 6 months after the offence. I have 21 days to respond.

In a statement it it says the conditional offer was sent 28/9. I never got that can I plead that in mitigation

can i ask for a copy of that?? and also for the individual who deals with that to review ?

What if they don't produce it ?

Its all changed so much in favour of the police now days.

I have no rights ???

This post has been edited by stewpots: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 18:30
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 18:45
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,713
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (stewpots @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 18:29) *
In a statement it it says the conditional offer was sent 28/9. I never got that can I plead that in mitigation

can i ask for a copy of that?? and also for the individual who deals with that to review ?

What if they don't produce it ?

Its all changed so much in favour of the police now days.

I have no rights ???


The CPS will provide evidence the CoFP entered the postal system. The law assumes it was delivered two business days later.

You won't get a copy of the CoFP - it is of no use to you. They don't have to produce it.

You can try and convince the court the CoFP was not delivered, and ask to be sentenced same as CoFP, but the court does not have grant your request if they are not convinced of non-delivery.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stewpots
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:08
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,198



QUOTE (peterguk @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 18:45) *
The CPS will provide evidence the CoFP entered the postal system. The law assumes it was delivered two business days later.

You won't get a copy of the CoFP - it is of no use to you. They don't have to produce it.

You can try and convince the court the CoFP was not delivered, and ask to be sentenced same as CoFP, but the court does not have grant your request if they are not convinced of non-delivery.


Why is the CoFP of no use to me ?

I assume on the day of the 'trial' the CPS can provide evidence it was sent and correctly addressed

In the old days i could ask for a copy but i assume i cant ask for anything

For clarity im looking to mitigate the costs not the guilt

I appreciate anyone could say they didn't get it and things do get lost in the post

If i plead guilty I assume the cofp would only help to mitigate the costs , if for example the police cant provide evidence it was sent.

This post has been edited by stewpots: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:10
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:15
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,713
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (stewpots @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:08) *
Why is the CoFP of no use to me ?


Because it's the evidence of posting that matters.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stewpots
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:20
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,198



From a web site

""A Written Charge and Single Justice Procedure Notice must be issued "at the same time" and within 6 months of the index offence. ""

A Written Charge and Single Justice Procedure Notice must be issued "at the same time" and within 6 months of the index offence. The day of the offence is excluded from the calculation. Some police authorities are failing to adhere to the rules and proceedings are sometimes discontinued where this is the case. The court has no jurisdiction to hear a case commenced outside of the statutory time limit.""""""""""""""


The letter came last week the SJPN was issues 12/2/2018 recd today

The offence 10/8/2017

so surely this notice is out of time ??

what is the 'written charge' ? not the previous letter ??

This post has been edited by stewpots: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:28
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stewpots
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:33
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,198



sorry last one

so the SJPN is dated 12/2/18 (offence 10/8/18)

the charge sheet is dated 6/2/18 on the other side of the SJPN, is the charge sheet the written charge ?

There issued at same time but with different dates but the SJPN is out of time anyway ??


---------------------------------

The advice from the Justices Clerks Society is largely accurate; both a Written Charge and Single Justice Procedure Notice must be issued “at the same time” and within 6 months of the index offence.

If you receive a Single Justice Procedure Notice then you should ascertain:

(i) the date of the alleged offence

(ii) the date on which a Written Charge document was issued

(iii) the date on which a Single Justice Procedure Notice was issued

(iv) were the aforementioned documents issued "at the same time?"

Put the prosecution to proof on the aforementioned. Require evidence to be produced.

This comment from the Society is highly dubious - "In reality, the decision of a prosecutor to issue a written charge will almost invariably be accompanied by a decision to proceed by way of SJPN, and thus the issue of both documents will be virtually simultaneous."

This post has been edited by stewpots: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:34
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:06
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,020
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Section 16A of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 states the court must be satisfied the written charge and the SJPN were served at the same time (which you don't dispute, you accept they're actually printed on the same piece of paper).

However section 29 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provides

"New method of instituting proceedings
(1)A public prosecutor may institute criminal proceedings against a person by issuing a document (a “written charge”) which charges the person with an offence.
(2)Where a public prosecutor issues a written charge, it must at the same time issue a document (a “requisition”) which requires the person to appear before a magistrates' court to answer the written charge.
"

If I understand you correctly you are saying is you want to challenge the proceedings on the basis that the written charge and the SJPN (the "requisition") were not issued at the same time?

There might be something in this, but I think it's a very high risk strategy with well under 50% chances of success. I don't know whether this particular point has been raised before the senior courts before (If it has I'm sure someone on here will say), however if it hasn't it could go either way. Given the downside risks, I don't think it's worth it. But if you have deep pockets and you want to pursue this strategy, I would strongly advise you get professional representation, I don't mean to be rude but I don't think you're equipped to argue this point in court.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:17
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27,673
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:06) *
However section 29 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provides

"New method of instituting proceedings
(1)A public prosecutor may institute criminal proceedings against a person by issuing a document (a “written charge”) which charges the person with an offence.
(2)Where a public prosecutor issues a written charge, it must at the same time issue a document (a “requisition”) which requires the person to appear before a magistrates' court to answer the written charge.
"


That has been amended as of 13/04/15 to read

QUOTE
(2) Where a relevant prosecutor issues a written charge, it must at the same time issue—
(a) a requisition, or
(b) a single justice procedure notice.
(2A) A requisition is a document which requires the person on whom it is served to appear before a magistrates' court to answer the written charge.
(2B) A single justice procedure notice is a document which requires the person on whom it is served to serve on the designated officer for a magistrates' court specified in the notice a written notification stating—
(a) whether the person desires to plead guilty or not guilty, and
(b) if the person desires to plead guilty, whether or not the person desires to be tried in accordance with section 16A of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.


QUOTE
I don't know whether this particular point has been raised before the senior courts before


Not yet.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:43
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,890
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



The last case on here that challenged this lost. The bench were particularly accommodating mind and the OP didn't pick up a large costs bill.

AGT Law had some info on this. http://www.counsel.direct/


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stewpots
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:51
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,198



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:06) *
Section 16A of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 states the court must be satisfied the written charge and the SJPN were served at the same time (which you don't dispute, you accept they're actually printed on the same piece of paper).

However section 29 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provides

"New method of instituting proceedings
(1)A public prosecutor may institute criminal proceedings against a person by issuing a document (a “written charge”) which charges the person with an offence.
(2)Where a public prosecutor issues a written charge, it must at the same time issue a document (a “requisition”) which requires the person to appear before a magistrates' court to answer the written charge.
"

If I understand you correctly you are saying is you want to challenge the proceedings on the basis that the written charge and the SJPN (the "requisition") were not issued at the same time?

There might be something in this, but I think it's a very high risk strategy with well under 50% chances of success. I don't know whether this particular point has been raised before the senior courts before (If it has I'm sure someone on here will say), however if it hasn't it could go either way. Given the downside risks, I don't think it's worth it. But if you have deep pockets and you want to pursue this strategy, I would strongly advise you get professional representation, I don't mean to be rude but I don't think you're equipped to argue this point in court.



I want to argue that the SJPN is out of time as its dated 12/2/2018 the offence was 10/8/2017 so its 6 months + 2 ie 1 day over. I understand there shouldn't be any lee way ??
I have money so will talk to a solicitor first.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 23:07
Post #55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,890
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



Look at this Thread.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stewpots
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 23:42
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,198



QUOTE (Jlc @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 23:07) *
Look at this Thread.


That case seem to be based on

"""As far as the judge was concerned the written charge was issued within 6 months and they were both issued together"".

However for me the single justice procedure notice came with the written charge

The SJPN was issued 12/2/18 , the charge says 6/2/18 but there on both sides of one piece of paper

but papers here sent after 6 months.

we will see many thanks

Ill talk to some solicitors
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 00:26
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,020
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (stewpots @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 23:42) *
Ill talk to some solicitors

Then I recommend you find a firm which specialises in motoring offences and court procedure, rather than one of those generic "civil / probate / family / crime / conveyancing / whatever else" firms you see on some high streets. You need to find someone who could confidently articulate an abuse of process application (I've had experienced barristers pursue such applications against me, and they've always failed), before the High Court if need be.

If it works, please do let us know.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 00:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stewpots
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 12:37
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,198



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 00:26) *
QUOTE (stewpots @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 23:42) *
Ill talk to some solicitors

Then I recommend you find a firm which specialises in motoring offences and court procedure, rather than one of those generic "civil / probate / family / crime / conveyancing / whatever else" firms you see on some high streets. You need to find someone who could confidently articulate an abuse of process application (I've had experienced barristers pursue such applications against me, and they've always failed), before the High Court if need be.

If it works, please do let us know.


This is a legal minefield so paid for advice but getting mixed messages but suggestion plead guilty but ask for it to get struck out seems odd ??

-----------------
That is not out of time.
The deadline is to lay in information before the courts. I suppose that is possible that they did it on the 11th which would be out of time but more likely they did it a few weeks earlier which would be in time.

The single justice procedure notice does not have to be with you within six months. If it were so, that would require the civil service administration of the court system to be a public body as well as the police and that is just not the case.

In any event, it is not grounds to plead not guilty. It is grounds to go to court and try to strike down the prosecution on the basis of abuse.
---------------------------


Can I clarify anything for you?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 12:47
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27,673
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Get a new lawyer?


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 12:51
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,713
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (stewpots @ Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 12:37) *
paid for advice


QUOTE (stewpots @ Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 12:37) *
suggestion plead guilty but ask for it to get struck out


Well that should work!

Sounds like one of Baldrick's cunning plans....

This post has been edited by peterguk: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 13:13


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 17th February 2018 - 22:59
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.